issue brief
UNDERSTANDING THE EPA’S
CLEAN POWER PLAN
The Clean Power Plan1 announced by President Obama on August 3 is a game changer because it sets the first-ever limits on
carbon pollution from power plants, the nation’s largest source of the pollution driving dangerous climate change. We are already
seeing the impacts of climate change in extreme weather, drought, wildfires, floods, and many other disruptions to the world we
depend on. Limiting carbon pollution from the nation’s power plants is the single biggest step we can take to fight climate chaos.
The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) issued the final Clean Power Plan under the Clean Air Act, the nation’s
fundamental air pollution law. This historic step to rein in power plant pollution will speed America’s transition away from fossil
fuels, protecting our health and helping to safeguard future generations from the worst effects of climate change.
The Clean Power Plan sets flexible and achievable standards that give each state the opportunity to design its own most costeffective pathway toward a cleaner electricity system. Achieving the Clean Power Plan goals will expand the nation’s economy
through investment in clean energy resources and position the United States to continue its global leadership on climate change.
The Clean Power Plan Means Big
Pollution Reductions to Protect
Our Health and Our Climate
The Clean Power plan will sharply reduce carbon pollution
and other dangerous air pollutants by shifting our electric
power system toward cleaner energy sources at a steady
but achievable pace. Enforceable carbon pollution limits
will kick in starting in 2022 and ramp up into full effect by
2030. Power companies will start acting sooner than 2022
in order to get ready and in response to additional clean
energy incentives in the Plan.
The EPA projects that by 2030, the Clean Power Plan will
have cut the electric sector’s carbon pollution by 32 percent
nationally, relative to 2005 levels.
In 2030 alone, the EPA projects that there will be 870
million fewer tons of carbon pollution. This is like canceling
out the annual carbon emissions from 70 percent of the
nation’s cars, or from the annual electricity use of all U.S.
homes.
For more information, please contact:
Starla Yeh
syeh@nrdc.org
http://www.nrdc.org/climate
By shifting our electric grid toward cleaner electricity, the
Clean Power Plan will also cut other power plant pollutants
that cause asthma attacks and respiratory illnesses. The
EPA projects that the Plan will prevent thousands of
premature deaths, 90,000 fewer asthma attacks in children,
and 300,000 missed work and school days in 2030.
Economists put a value of $20 billion on the Clean Power
Plan’s climate benefits in 2030, and a value of $14 billion
to $34 billion on the lives saved and other health benefits.
While the Plan will involve compliance costs of around
$8 billion in 2030, total benefits will exceed costs by $26
billion to $45 billion.
The shift to energy efficiency and cleaner power will save
the average American family $85 on its electricity bills in
2030. These electric bill savings will total $155 billion over
the decade leading up to 2030.
www.nrdc.org/policy
www.facebook.com/nrdc.org
www.twitter.com/nrdc
august 2015
iB:15-07-f
FIGURE 1. PROJECTED NATIONAL CO2 EMISSIONS REDUCTIONS UNDER THE CLEAN POWER PLAN
Figure 1. Projected National CO2 Emissions Under the Clean Power Plan
Electric Sector Emissions (Million Short Tons)
3,000
2,500
2,000
1,500
1,000
500
0
2005
2010
HISTORICAL
2015
2015 REFERENCE CASE
The EPA Establishes Standards;
States Submit Plans
The EPA adopted the Clean Power Plan under the Clean Air
Act, which the Supreme Court ruled in 2011 provides the
legal authority to control carbon pollution from America’s
fleet of fossil-fueled power plants. Under this authority, the
Clean Power Plan establishes a federal-state process for
controlling power plant pollution.
First, the Clean Power Plan establishes national carbon
dioxide emissions performance rates for existing coal- and
gas-fired power plants. These performance rates reflect
the emission reductions achievable using the “best system
of emission reduction” (BSER), taking into account cost
and other factors. States then have an opportunity to adopt
“state plans”—including enforceable emission limits—for
their coal and gas plants. The Clean Power Plan describes
multiple ways that states can structure their plans and
emission limits.
The Clean Air Act does not require any state to adopt a
plan to curb its power plant pollution. If a state chooses
not to adopt a satisfactory plan, however, our national air
pollution law provides a federal guarantee for our health
and well-being. In that case, it is the EPA’s responsibility to
regulate the power plants in that state directly.
The Clean Power Plan calls on states to make initial state
plan submissions by September 2016. They can receive
extensions to complete their plans by September 2018.
The plans have to include enforceable emission limits that
plants must comply with starting in 2022 and ramping up
2020
PROPOSED CPP
2025
2030
FINALIZED CPP (RATE-BASED)
to full strength by 2030. The EPA must review state plans
to determine whether they can be approved. If a state does
not submit a satisfactory initial plan by September 2016, or
a satisfactory final plan by September 2018, then the EPA
must adopt and enforce a federal plan that puts enforceable
limits on the state’s carbon-polluting power plants.
Establishing the “Best System
of Emission Reduction”
In the Clean Power Plan, the EPA identified the “best system
of emissions reduction” for existing coal- and gas-fired
power plants. Because power plants all supply the same
product—electricity—and are all interconnected through
the electric grid, the EPA determined that the BSER
includes (1) measures that can be applied at individual
coal plants (such as reducing emissions by burning fuel
more efficiently), (2) measures that provide those plants
credit for shifting the mix of electricity generation toward
sources that produce less carbon pollution (such as using
existing coal plants less and existing gas plants more), and
(3) measures that allow credit for electricity generation
with no carbon pollution at all (such as replacing fossilfuel generation with more power from wind turbines, solar
panels, or other zero-emitting power sources). The EPA
calls these three types of measures the “building blocks”
of BSER. Much greater carbon pollution reductions can be
accomplished at reasonable cost using all three building
blocks than if plants were limited to equipment or fuel
changes at individual sites.
Page 2 UNDERSTANDING THE EPA’S CLEAN POWER PLAN nrdc
What happened to energy efficiency?
In the proposed Clean Power Plan, EPA included a fourth building block, end-use energy efficiency, in setting emission rate targets. Energy
efficiency cuts pollution by reducing how much electricity generation we need in order to run our lights, appliances, cooling systems, etc. Some
commenters raised questions about using efficiency as a building block for setting emission rates but wanted efficiency measures to continue
to count for compliance with those rates. That’s what the final Clean Power Plan provides. Energy efficiency will still play a critical role in
meeting the Plan’s emission limits at low cost.
One of the biggest improvements in the final Clean
Power Plan is that it reflects up-to-date data on the cost,
performance, and growth trends for renewable electricity
generation. Wind and solar costs have declined by more
than 40 percent compared with the EPA’s outdated
assumptions in the original proposal. As a result, the EPA
projects much faster renewable electricity growth, and
significantly more emission reduction as a result, than it did
in the original proposal.
From these building blocks, EPA established two national
emission performance rates as BSER—one for steam
generators, and one for natural gas–fired combined cycle
(NGCC) turbines. (Emissions performance rates restrict
how much carbon pollution a plant may release per unit of
electricity that it generates, expressed as pounds of CO2
per megawatt-hour, or lbs CO2/MWh.) These rates were
applied in the same manner to the states to yield each state’s
planning target.
The EPA carefully analyzed the cost and feasibility of
cutting carbon pollution by a combination of the three
building blocks, looking at what emission reductions could
be accomplished across three big segments of the country’s
electricity grid (the Eastern Interconnect, the Western
Interconnect, and the Texas grid). The EPA used this
analysis very conservatively, setting the national emission
performance rates on the basis of the least stringent of the
results coming from the building block analysis in the three
regions.
These national emission performance rates will apply to
plants starting in 2022, and they will ramp emissions down
over the following eight years to full strength in 2030,
providing a “glide path” as requested by many industry
stakeholders who commented on the original Clean Power
Plan proposal. For 2030 and beyond, the national emission
performance rates will be: 1,305 lbs CO2/MWh for steam
generators, and 771 lbs CO2/MWh for gas-fired turbines.
The interim and final performance rates and glide paths
for both plant types are illustrated in Figure 2.
These national emission performance rates treat coal and
gas power plants consistently and fairly wherever they
are located. Coal and gas plants can readily achieve their
respective emission performance rates using credits from
cost-effective investments in clean resources as described
below, and they can meet customer needs for reliable
electricity services with much less carbon pollution.
FIGURE Performance
2. NATIONAL
Figure 2. National Emissions
RateEMISSIONS
by Power PlantRATE
Type LIMITS BY POWER PLANT TYPE
Emissions Rates (lbs CO2/MWh)
2,000
1,500
1,000
500
0
2022
STEAM GLIDE PATH
NGCC GLIDE PATH
2024
2026
STEAM INTERIM PERFORMANCE RATE
NGCC INTERIM PERFORMANCE RATE
2028
2030
STEAM 2030 PERFORMANCE RATE
NGCC 2030 PERFORMANCE RATE
Page 3 UNDERSTANDING THE EPA’S CLEAN POWER PLAN nrdc
500
IN THE PROPOSAL, 2030 TARGETS RANGED BETWEEN
215 LBS/MWH AND 1,783 LBS/MWH—WHEREAS IN THE FINAL RULE,
2030 TARGETS RANGE BETWEEN 771 LBS/MWH AND 1,305 LBS/MWH
reducing its own emissions and investing in emission
States Have an Array of Options to Set
reducing actions at other locations in the power system,
0 MT ND WV WYLimits
NE KS MD on
KY IA Power
MO IL IN MNPlants
TN OH UT WI CO MI SD SC NM NC AR LA PA OK GA TX AZ AL WA MS VA FL NY DE OR NH NV CA MA NJ CT ME ID RI
Enforceable
either in the same state or elsewhere in the country. These
The Clean Power Plan then gives states a range of flexible
options for designing plans to set enforceable limits on
power plant pollution.
investments can be made either directly or by acquiring
emission rate credits—credits for shifting generation to
cleaner sources or improving end-use energy efficiency.
The “two-rate” approach. First, states can choose to write
A power company can create those credits by taking
plans that adopt and enforce the two national emission
measures within its own company, by contracting with
performance rates on their coal and gas plants. The state
another company to do so, or by purchasing credits created
plan’s enforceable limits would mirror those in Figure 2.
by others in an emissions credit marketplace. The cost of
compliance measures—both in-plant measures and emission
Under this approach, each plant needs to meet the
reduction credits—then influences which plants run more
CPP FINALIZED
INTERIM
EMISSIONS
applicable emission
rate limit through
a combination
of TARGETS
and which run less.
Figure 3. Finalized Power Plant Limits by State in the Interim Period (2022–2029)
Emission Rate Limits (lbs CO2/MWh)
2,000
Interim Steam Performance Rate = 1,534 lbs/MWh
1,500
1,000
Interim NGCC Performance Rate = 832 lbs/MWh
500
0
IN THE PROPOSAL, INTERIM TARGETS RANGED BETWEEN
244 LBS/MWH AND 1,882 LBS/MWH—WHEREAS IN THE FINAL RULE,
INTERIM TARGETS RANGE BETWEEN 832 LBS/MWH AND 1,534 LBS/MWH.
CPP FINALIZED 2030 EMISSIONS TARGETS
MT ND WV WY NE KS MD KY IA MO IL IN MN TN OH UT WI CO MI SD SC NM NC AR LA PA OK GA TX AZ AL WA MS VA FL NY DE OR NH NV CA MA NJ CT ME ID RI
Figure 4. Finalized Power Plant Limits by State in 2030
Emission Rate Limits (lbs CO2/MWh)
2,000
1,500
2030 Steam Performance Rate = 1,305 lbs/MWh
1,000
2030 NGCC Performance Rate = 771 lbs/MWh
500
0
IN THE PROPOSAL, 2030 TARGETS RANGED BETWEEN
215 LBS/MWH AND 1,783 LBS/MWH—WHEREAS IN THE FINAL RULE,
2030 TARGETS RANGE BETWEEN 771 LBS/MWH AND 1,305 LBS/MWH
MT ND WV WY NE KS MD KY IA MO IL IN MN TN OH UT WI CO MI SD SC NM NC AR LA PA OK GA TX AZ AL WA MS VA FL NY DE OR NH NV CA MA NJ CT ME ID RI
Page 4 UNDERSTANDING THE EPA’S CLEAN POWER PLAN nrdc
Rate-based plans must establish an accounting approach
starting with each plant’s reported CO2 emission rate, and
adjusting for emission reduction rate credits acquired from
shifts in generation to cleaner sources and energy efficiency.
States must verify the authenticity of credits obtained
from energy efficiency and from low- and zero-emitting
generation.
State-specific emission rate limits. As a second option, the Clean
Power Plan establishes state-specific emission rate limits.
These state-specific limits are a blend of the national
emission rate limits for coal and gas plants, weighted to
reflect the mix of electricity generated from the two types
of plants in each state at the starting point in 2012. The
state-by-state emission rate limits are shown in Figure 3 for
2022–2029 and Figure 4 for 2030 and beyond.
As in the two-rate approach, each power plant uses a
combination of its own actions and emission rate credits to
meet the applicable state-specific emission rate limit.
The state-specific emission rate limits establish consistent
and fair targets for power plants in all states, falling
somewhere between the national emission rate limits for
coal plants and gas plants. The limits in the final Clean
Power Plan thus respond to state and industry concerns that
the state limits in the original proposal varied too widely
and treated plants and states inconsistently (illustrated by
the bar at the right of each figure). In short, the final Plan
treats like plants alike, and like states alike.
“Mass-based” limits. Many other federal and state power plant
pollution programs establish mass-based pollution limits.
The acid rain and cross-state smog programs, for example,
limit how many tons of pollution a plant may emit each year,
rather than the amount of pollution per unit of electricity
generated. A number of states, including California and the
Northeastern and mid-Atlantic members of the Regional
Greenhouse Gas Initiative (RGGI)—have already established
mass-based state programs to cut carbon pollution. Many
state and industry stakeholders told the EPA that they
wanted the option to curb carbon pollution this way under
the Clean Power Plan.
In response, the final Clean Power Plan establishes
equivalent mass-based limits for each state. These limits
convert each state-specific emission rate limit to an
equivalent amount of tons per year, by multiplying the
state’s emission rate limit by the anticipated amount of
electricity production in the state. The EPA’s conversion
method includes factors for economic growth and associated
increases in electricity consumption. A state can then
choose to write its plan to include an annual CO2 tonnage
limit for each plant.
Compliance under a mass-based approach works differently
from the rate-based approach. Under a mass-based
approach, the state issues emission allowances equal to the
number of tons of emissions allowed in the state. Each coal
or gas plant needs one emission allowance for each ton of
CO2 that it emits. The cost of allowances then figures into
decisions about which plants to operate and encourages a
shift to lower- or zero-emitting power. States can decide
whether to auction the allowances (using the proceeds for
renewables and efficiency programs or customer rebates) or
to distribute them by other means.
The Clean Power Plan allows states to choose two versions
of mass-based plans. A state can include both existing and
Page 5 UNDERSTANDING THE EPA’S CLEAN POWER PLAN nrdc
new fossil-fueled plants, requiring both to hold allowances
for each ton of emissions. Alternatively, it can include only
existing plants, but in that case the state must account for
pollution increases from “leakage”—shifting generation to
new plants outside the cap—which would mean that the
mass-based limit is no longer equivalent to the emission rate
limit from which it was derived. We recommend that states
include both existing and new power plants in mass-based
plans to avoid competitiveness issues and the erosion of
pollution reductions due to emissions from new plants.
The state-by-state emission limits, both rate-based and
mass-based, are shown in Table 1.
Table 1. Emission Limits for Power Plants by State: 2022–2029, and 2030 and Beyond
Emissions Rate (lbs/MWh)
State
2012 Rate
AK
Total Emissions (million short tons)
Interim
(2022-2029)
Rate Limit
2030
Rate Limit
TBD
TBD
2012
Emissions
Interim
(2022-2029)
Mass Limit,
Existing Only
Interim
(2022-2029)
Mass Limit,
Existing + New
2030
Mass Limit,
Existing Only
2030
Mass Limit,
Existing + New
2
TBD
TBD
TBD
TBD
AL
1,518
1,157
1,018
76
62
63
57
58
AR
1,779
1,304
1,130
40
34
34
30
31
AZ
1,552
1,173
1,031
40
33
34
30
32
CA
963
907
828
46
51
54
48
53
CO
1,973
1,362
1,174
42
33
35
30
32
CT
846
852
786
7
7
7
7
7
DE
1,254
1,023
916
5
5
5
5
5
FL
1,247
1,026
919
118
113
115
105
107
GA
1,600
1,198
1,049
63
51
52
46
47
TBD
TBD
5
TBD
TBD
TBD
TBD
HI
IA
2,195
1,505
1,283
38
28
29
25
25
ID
858
832
771
1
2
2
1
2
IL
2,208
1,456
1,245
96
75
76
66
67
IN
2,021
1,451
1,242
107
86
87
76
77
KS
2,319
1,519
1,293
34
25
25
22
22
KY
2,166
1,509
1,286
91
71
72
63
64
LA
1,618
1,293
1,121
43
39
40
35
36
MA
1,003
902
824
13
13
13
12
12
MD
2,031
1,510
1,287
20
16
16
14
14
ME
873
842
779
2
2
2
2
2
MI
1,928
1,355
1,169
70
53
54
48
48
MN
2,033
1,414
1,213
28
25
26
23
23
MO
2,008
1,490
1,272
78
63
63
55
56
MS
1,185
1,061
945
26
27
28
25
26
MT
2,481
1,534
1,305
18
13
13
11
12
NC
1,780
1,311
1,136
59
57
58
51
52
ND
2,368
1,534
1,305
33
24
24
21
21
NE
2,161
1,522
1,296
27
21
21
18
18
NH
1,119
947
858
5
4
4
4
4
NJ
1,091
885
812
15
17
18
17
17
NM
1,798
1,325
1,146
17
14
14
12
13
NV
1,102
942
855
16
14
15
14
15
NY
1,140
1,025
918
35
34
34
31
32
Page 6 UNDERSTANDING THE EPA’S CLEAN POWER PLAN nrdc
Table 1. Emission Limits for Power Plants by State: 2022–2029, and 2030 and Beyond
Emissions Rate (lbs/MWh)
Total Emissions (million short tons)
2012
Emissions
Interim
(2022-2029)
Mass Limit,
Existing Only
Interim
(2022-2029)
Mass Limit,
Existing + New
2030
Mass Limit,
Existing Only
2030
Mass Limit,
Existing + New
State
2012 Rate
Interim
(2022-2029)
Rate Limit
OH
1,900
1,383
1,190
102
83
83
74
75
OK
1,565
1,223
1,068
53
45
45
40
41
OR
1,089
964
871
8
9
9
8
9
PA
1,682
1,258
1,095
117
99
101
90
91
RI
918
832
771
4
4
4
4
4
2030
Rate Limit
SC
1,791
1,338
1,156
36
29
29
26
26
SD
2,229
1,352
1,167
3
4
4
4
4
TN
2,015
1,411
1,211
41
32
32
28
29
TX
1,566
1,188
1,042
241
208
213
190
198
UT
1,874
1,368
1,179
31
27
28
24
25
VA
1,477
1,047
934
27
30
30
27
28
WA
1,566
1,111
983
7
12
12
11
12
WI
1,996
1,364
1,176
42
31
32
28
28
WV
2,064
1,534
1,305
72
58
59
51
52
WY
2,331
1,526
1,299
50
36
37
32
33
“State measures” plans. The Clean Power Plan allows for one
more type of state flexibility. Some states may want to
place obligations, as a matter of state law, on entities other
than fossil-fueled power plants to help meet Clean Power
Plan goals. For example, a state could adopt a mass-based
program that covers other industries as well as power
plants. A state also could adopt or enhance “renewable
portfolio standards” or other measures that place a statelaw obligation on entities other than coal or gas plants to
produce clean energy or achieve efficiency gains. The EPA
will accept such a plan, so long as it contains enforceable
backup limits (in rate-based or mass-based form) on carbon
pollution from those power plants themselves.
Other state plan requirements. All state plans have to include
some common elements. To be approved, a state plan must
demonstrate that it has enforceable limits on power plants
that will achieve the relevant carbon pollution rate-based or
mass-based limits. There must be adequate monitoring and
reporting requirements. The plan has to show that the state
has considered electric system reliability. The plan must
have been developed with public participation and after
public hearings, and it must show that the state has engaged
stakeholders including low-income communities and other
vulnerable populations.
When Are State Plans Due?
The final Clean Power Plan allows lead time for states
to develop plans and for power plants to meet their
enforceable limits. The Plan sets out this time line for state
plan development and compliance by power plants:
Clean Power Plan Time Line
State Plan Development
Power Plant Compliance
• Initial State Plan submission
due to EPA Sept. 6, 2016
• Compliance with Interim
Standards starting
Jan. 1, 2022
• States that submit initial
plans may request extensions
to complete the plan by
Sept. 6, 2018
• States with extensions to report
progress by Sept. 6, 2017
• Interim compliance period
extends for eight years, with
three subperiods
• Compliance with Final
Standards starts Jan. 1, 2030
• States must submit status
reports to EPA July 1, 2021
Emissions Trading Will Lower Costs
and Expand Flexibility
As already indicated, power plants can comply least
expensively by using emission rate credits or emission
allowances, depending on which kind of plan their state
adopts. States can submit “trading ready” plans either
individually or in groups. States with approved plans can
then allow their plants to trade credits or allowances with
plants in states with approved plans of the same type. For
example, a group of states with mass-based plans (such as
the RGGI states) can agree to allow power plants to trade
emission allowances with each other across state lines. A
group of states with rate-based emission limits can allow
power plants to trade emission rate credits across state
lines, if the states adopt the national uniform rates or blend
their enforceable emission limits into one weighted-average
Page 7 UNDERSTANDING THE EPA’S CLEAN POWER PLAN nrdc
rate. These trading provisions will allow power plants to
participate in larger markets and reduce costs, without
requiring states to develop and submit formal multistate
plans.
Incentives Will Encourage Early Investments
in Renewables and Energy Efficiency
Early investments in renewables and energy efficiency
will help power plants comply with their enforceable limits
in 2022 and later years. Energy efficiency or renewable
energy projects that started after 2012 can earn credits
or allowances for emission reductions they produce in
2022 and beyond; those reductions can count toward
compliance with plants’ enforceable limits, whether
rate-based or mass-based.
In addition, the final Clean Power Plan creates a new
Clean Energy Incentive Program (CEIP) that will generate
additional early compliance credits. The CEIP allows states
to award credits or allowances to qualifying renewable
electricity generation, and to qualifying energy efficiency
savings in low-income communities, for emission reductions
achieved in 2020 and 2021 before the compliance period
begins. Projects are eligible if they are initiated after the
state submits its final state plan. The program is voluntary
and rewards states that complete their plans early. Entities
that earn credits or allowances in 2020 and 2021 can sell
them to fossil power plants for use in 2022 or later to help
meet their emission limits.
The CEIP program description states that projects can
earn credits or allowances up to a nationwide total of 600
million tons. Wind or solar projects will receive a halfcredit from the state (borrowed) and a half-credit from the
EPA (additional). Low-income energy efficiency projects will
generate two credits, one from the EPA and one from the
state. The EPA is taking comments on further details of the
CEIP as part of the federal plan proposal.
Flexibility Ensures Reliable Electricity
The Clean Power Plan assures that power companies will
be able to cut carbon pollution and provide reliable
electricity at the same time. Reliability is enabled and
assured by the many layers of flexibility in the design of
state and federal plans, plus the flexibilities provided by
emissions trading and early incentives. States have plenty
of time to plan and prepare for compliance. The final Plan
phases in emission reductions more slowly than in the
proposal. The Plan also requires states to consider grid
reliability when designing their plans. And grid operators,
states, and federal agencies (the EPA, the Federal Energy
Regulatory Commission, and the U.S. Department of
Energy) will be working together, planning to meet power
needs with pollution control obligations in mind, and
watching closely to ensure reliability.
As an extra safeguard, the final Clean Power Plan includes
a backstop reliability provision to protect the grid in the
case of wholly unpredictable emergency events, while
keeping the states on track to meet their final targets.
States can grant a power plant an alternative, more lenient
emission limit for up to 90 days if there are extraordinary
circumstances requiring a plant to operate in excess of
otherwise applicable pollution limits in order to maintain
reliable electricity service. If such operations are needed
for longer, then the state must make up for the plant’s
excess emissions through additional reductions elsewhere,
or the state must revise its plan to stay in compliance.
In short, the power grid will remain strong as states
implement the Clean Power Plan.
The Federal Plan Guarantees Pollution
Reductions if States Do Not Act
The Clean Air Act, as noted above, creates fundamental
national air pollution safeguards. In this program under
Section 111(d) as well as several other programs, the Clean
Air Act invites states to take the lead by crafting state
plans to regulate their polluters in a way that is tailored to
state and local conditions. For 45 years, states have almost
always chosen to develop and carry out plans to implement
Clean Air Act protections.
In the rare cases where states choose not to act, the Clean
Air Act provides a critical guarantee that the national
government will regulate polluters directly.
To meet its responsibilities, EPA has proposed the federal
regulations it will implement if necessary. The federal plan
proposal, now open for public comment, lays out both ratebased and mass-based options consistent with the Clean
Power Plan provisions described above. It also includes
corresponding “model plan” provisions that states can
choose to adopt, simplifying the plan development process.
Although some are urging governors to refuse to cooperate,
most power companies and other state stakeholders want
their states to take the lead, in preference to a federal plan.
And most governors appear committed to move ahead.
Conclusion
The Clean Power Plan makes history by setting the first
national limits on carbon pollution from America’s power
plants, the largest source of the pollution driving dangerous
climate change. It provides power companies and states
with a fair, reasonable, and achievable blueprint to cut
carbon pollution over the next 15 years. It will deliver public
health and climate protection benefits many times its cost.
It will create thousands of good-paying jobs that can’t be
outsourced, and it will help Americans cut their monthly
electric bills.
Without doubt, the Clean Power Plan is a good deal
for America.
1Information in this issue brief is based on NRDC’s analysis of the Clean Power Plan, which can be found on the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s website at
http://www2.epa.gov/cleanpowerplan/clean-power-plan-existing-power-plants.
Page 8 UNDERSTANDING THE EPA’S CLEAN POWER PLAN nrdc